Top 100 NBA Players: #35

Gary Payton

(Kalb: #36, Simmons: #40, BBR: #36)

Gary Payton may have been the best two-way point guard in the history of the league, getting it done consistently on both ends of the floor for more than a decade, and he played on some pretty good teams, missing the playoffs just twice in his 17-year career.

In 1995-96, Michael Jordan had just returned from his first retirement, and the Bulls had set an NBA record with 72 wins in the regular season, and then they walked right through the first three rounds of the playoffs with an 11-1 record, giving them an overall record of 83-11 up to that point. It may not seem like much, but the Sonics took two games from the Bulls in the Finals, which was quite an accomplishment considering that Chicago had only lost about once every three weeks during the previous 7 months. Payton was the star of that team, and probably would have won a title in any other season.

Payton's teammate, Shawn Kemp, started to go downhill after that season, leaving Payton without a teammate to help him return to the Finals. Over the next two years Seattle lost in the second round, but Payton was still putting up great numbers, which are below:

Payton - 23.9 pts, 4.5 reb, 7.9 ast, 2.0 stl, .438 FG%, .352 3P%, .874 FT%

He did eventually get back to the NBA Finals twice, once in 2004 with the Los Angeles Lakers, where he was just an average starter, then again with Miami in 2006, when he was no longer a relevant player, but still earned himself a championship ring in his 16th season.

As I mentioned above, Payton was more than just a great offensive player, he was also one of the top defensive point guards of all time. He led the league in steals once, in 1996, the same year he was named Defensive Player of the Year. He averaged over 2 steals per game 8 times, and still ranks #4 all time in total steals. In addition, he was named to the All-Defensive First Team 9 straight times, meaning that he was considered the best defensive point guard in the league for almost an entire decade.

Payton, like Cousy, was the best guard in the league at one point, but Payton did it when there was a lot more competition, and his 2000 season was amazing, with 24.2 points, 6.5 rebounds, 8.9 assists, and 1.9 steals per game. Cousy had more playoff success, but he was only the top player on a Finalist twice, just once more than Payton. Payton's peak was higher, and he lasted a couple years longer than Cousy, plus he played in an era when there was more competition for the top spot, so the guy who was undeniably great on both ends gets the slight edge.

College Football Preseason Rankings

For the first time in history, I've decided to release my own version of the preseason rankings. These rankings are still based on my usual formula, which takes margin of victory, strength of schedule, momentum, and home field advantage into account to determine which teams are better than others, but because no games have been played yet this season, I've used last season's final standing as a base, then moved teams around based on how many of their players will be returning for this season. I based these on the player statistics for each player, rather than just a total returning, because you could return most of your players and still lose the three guys who did most of the work. So, here they are, the preseason college football rankings, with team name followed by last year's record and final ranking, along with this season's predicted record and their preseason AP ranking.

Rank - Team - 2010 Record/Rank - 2011 Predicted Record - AP Rank (Preseason)
1. Stanford 12-1 (4) 12-0 (7)
2. Oregon 12-1 (3) 11-1 (3)
3. Boise State 12-1 (9) 12-0 (5)
4. Arizona State 6-6 (NR) 11-1 (28)
5. Alabama 10-3 (10) 10-2 (2)
6. Florida State 10-4 (17) 11-1 (6)
7. Oklahoma 12-2 (6) 10-2 (1)
8. South Carolina 9-5 (22) 10-2 (12)
9. Arkansas 10-3 (12) 10-2 (15)
10. Oklahoma State 11-2 (13) 11-1 (9)
11. Louisiana State 11-2 (8) 9-3 (4)
12. North Carolina State 9-4 (25) 11-1 (34)
13. Florida 8-5 (31) 9-3 (22)
14. Wisconsin 11-2 (7) 11-1 (11)
15. Arizona 7-6 (NR) 7-5 (44)
16. Mississippi State 9-4 (15) 8-4 (20)
17. Southern California 8-5 (NR) 8-4 (25)
18. Virginia Tech 11-3 (16) 12-0 (13)
19. Nebraska 10-4 (20) 11-1 (10)
20. Auburn 14-0 (1) 7-5 (23)
21. Texas A&M 9-4 (19) 10-2 (8)
22. Ohio State 12-1 (5) 11-1 (18)
23. Notre Dame 8-5 (33) 11-1 (16)
24. Northern Illinois 11-3 (29) 11-1 (41)
25. Missouri 10-3 (18) 8-4 (21)

Ranked Teams by Conference

SEC - 7
Pac 12 - 5
Big 12 - 4
ACC - 3
Big 10 - 3
MWC - 1
MAC - 1
Ind - 1

My top three teams each finished last season with just one loss, each to a ranked opponent, and all 3 have their quarterbacks returning this season. I give Stanford the slight edge over Oregon this year, but it should be a tight game, and it will likely determine the Pac-12 title and a spot in the BCS title game.

Arizona State is one of the big surprises on this list, but if you watched my rankings last year, you saw that I had them ranked throughout the season. That's because four of their six losses were by 4 points or less to teams that were or should have been ranked. Five of their six wins were by at least 10 points, with the only exception in the season-ending double overtime victory over rival Arizona. Almost every single player returned this year, and they should surprise a lot of people.

Oklahoma was ranked #1 by many of the preseason polls, but the Big 12 is considerably weaker now with the loss of Nebraska, so they won't have many chances to gain strength of schedule numbers. They play Oklahoma State and Florida State on the road, both of which are very dangerous opponents. I see this as a mistake on the part of the voters.

Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Ohio State are all representing the Big 10 in the preseason rankings, but thanks to the lack of other good teams in the conference, it's quite likely that we will end up with a 3-way tie for the top again this year after they each take turns beating each other. There's no standout team here, but the conference's supposed reputation will keep these three in the conversation for the BCS title game long after they shouldn't be mentioned.

Virginia Tech is ranked #18 in my preseason rankings, yet I have them projected to finish the regular season undefeated. This is not a misprint. They do not have a single ranked team on their schedule, but they will likely face either Florida State or NC State in the ACC Championship game and get totally destroyed, which will leave us with two teams with unblemished records: Stanford and Boise State. We'll see what excuse the BCS uses this year to put someone else up against Stanford.

So there you go, the preseason college football top 25 is complete. Check back soon to see my predictions for the winner's of this weekend's contests, and we'll see if I can improve upon my record from last season.

Top 100 NBA Players: #36

Bob Cousy

(Kalb: #10, Simmons: #21, BBR: #42)

Bob Cousy was one of the greatest guards in the early days of the NBA, a man who held the record for most consecutive seasons leading the league in assists for over 30 years, and a proven winner who needs to use both hands in order to wear all of his championship rings.

Many people try to say that Cousy would have had more assists in today's NBA, where assists are supposedly easier to come by, but I showed in my profile on John Stockton (#60) that this was not true. The average assists per team per game has been largely unchanged over the past 60 years, with the only dry period for assists coming in the league's first 5 seasons. The fact is that the average in 1953, Cousy's first season leading the league in assists, was 21.1 per game, while today that average has skyrocketed to 21.5.

The real reason that Cousy did not get more assists during all those seasons he was leading the league is that there was no position called point guard back then, just guards. Because of this, there was no designated ballhandler on any certain team, which makes it even more impressive that Cousy led the league for 8 straight seasons.

Another thing that makes Cousy one of the greats is that he was the best player in the entire league for two seasons early in his career. In 1954 and 1955, before the MVP award had been created, Cousy was arguably the league's elite star, with Neil Johnston as his nearest competitor. Here are their stats from those two seasons:

Cousy (1954) - 19.2 pts, 5.5 reb, 7.2 ast, .385 FG%, .787 FT%, 42-30 record
Johnston (1954) - 24.4 pts, 11.1 reb, 2.8 ast, .449 FG%, .747 FT%, 29-43 record

Cousy (1955) - 21.2 pts, 6.0 reb, 7.8 ast, .397 FG%, .807 FT%, 36-36 record
Johnston (1955) - 22.7 pts, 15.1 reb, 3.0 ast, .440 FG%, .766 FT%, 33-39 record

Both players were great scorers for the time (ranked #1 and #2 in both seasons), and both were great at their areas of specialty (assists for Cousy and rebounds for Johnston), but Cousy was also a very good rebounder, while Johnston was not known for passing the ball much. Cousy's teams were also much better then Johnston's and made the playoffs both years, something Johnston's Warriors teams didn't.

Some people will say that Cousy won all those championships because of Bill Russell, but the truth is that without Cousy, they may not have won the first four of those titles. In fact, during Russell's rookie season of 1956-57, Cousy was still the best player on the Celtics' title team, and he was still the best player the next year when they lost in the Finals. That's when Russell took over as the star, but Cousy was still #2 in Boston for three more seasons, and was still an important player on the next two title teams, retiring after winning his sixth title. Before Russell even arrived, Cousy had led Boston to three straight Eastern Conference Finals, so there is no doubt that he was a winner, but the combination of Russell and Cousy was what made them unstoppable.

Cousy and Worthy were actually quite similar, both being known as the sidekick on great championship dynasties. Both played in at least 6 NBA Finals, with Cousy winning twice as many titles as Worthy (6 to 3). Cousy had the distinction of being the best player in the NBA for a couple years, while Worthy never approached that level. All in all, it seems quite obvious that Cousy has to be ranked higher on this list.

Top 100 NBA Players: #37

James Worthy

(Simmons: #48, BBR: #25)

James Worthy was one of the great sidekicks of the 1980's, playing alongside Magic Johnson on six teams that advanced to the NBA Finals and coming up big when it really mattered, which earned him the nickname "Big Game James."

While nobody will dispute the fact that Magic Johnson was a better player than James Worthy, Worthy was actually the Lakers' leading scorer in 3 of the 9 seasons they played together. For 7 straight seasons he averaged between 19.4 and 21.4 points. He always got between 5 and 6 rebounds per game, and the Lakers (almost) always made it to the NBA Finals. His steadiness makes it very difficult to pick out a single season and call it his best.

From 1984 to 1986, Worthy was the Lakers' third-best player, playing behind Magic and Kareem, and won a championship during that time. The Lakers went on to win two titles in 1987 and 1988, with Worthy supplanting Kareem as the #2 guy. In 1989, Magic had a down season and Worthy took over as the best player on the Lakers team that was swept in the Finals. In 1991, he made one final trip to the Finals, again playing behind Magic on the team that lost to Michael Jordan and Chicago.

Worthy was named the MVP of the 1988 NBA Finals after his great performances in the final two games of the title series. In game 6 he scored 28 points and grabbed 9 rebounds, then he easily surpassed that in game 7, when he put up a triple-double of 36 points, 16 rebounds, and 10 assists. While it was probably Worthy's performance in those two games that clinched the championship, he still wasn't the best Laker in those playoffs. Here are he and Magic's stats from 1988:

Magic - 19.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 12.6 ast, .514 FG%, .500 3P%, .852 FT%
Worthy - 21.1 pts, 5.8 reb, 4.4 ast, .523 FG%, .111 3P%, .758 FT%

Arguments have been made that Worthy would not have been considered one of the all-time greats if he hadn't been drafted by the Lakers, and that may just be true, but the fact is that it happened, and Worthy did exactly what he was supposed to do and fulfilled the role that was given to him perfectly for a decade, which allowed the Lakers to continue to prosper even after Kareem was well past his prime.

Worthy was never as big a star as Carter was, but he was much more consistent. He never had the huge career swoon that Carter had to recover from, and he made it farther in the playoffs than Carter ever did 7 times and has 3 championship rings to show for it. Worthy showed up when it counted, and that winning attitude puts him above Vince Carter in the all-time rankings.

Top 100 NBA Players: #38

Vince Carter

(Simmons: #83, BBR: #80)

In Bill Simmons' The Book of Basketball, he uses his entire section on Vince Carter to complain about how Vince Carter would have been a better player if he had just cared more, and he has a point, which I will show you later, but when he was healthy and motivated, he showed the potential to be one of the best players of all time.

Vince Carter averaged over 20 points per game for 10 consecutive seasons, and he also averaged over 4 rebounds and 3 assists for that entire time as well. In his best season, 2000-2001, he averaged 27.6 points per game, fifth in the league, while averaging 5.5 rebounds and 3.9 assists as well. That year he also took Toronto to their only playoff series win, playing just as well in the playoffs as the regular season. That season, the only player in the league who was definitely better than Vince was Shaq, who had hit his prime.

Unfortunately, Carter was slowed by injuries over the next two seasons, and Toronto's momentum slowed, causing Vince to decide he didn't want to try anymore. He finally gave up in the beginning of the 2004-05 season, showing so little effort that it came as no surprise when he admitted after a trade to New Jersey that he hadn't been trying in Toronto. Here are his pre- and post-trade stats for that season:

Carter (TOR) - 15.9 pts, 3.3 reb, 3.1 ast, .411 FG%, .322 3P%, .694 FT%
Carter (NJN) - 27.5 pts, 5.9 reb, 4.7 ast, .462 FG%, .425 3P%, .817 FT%

The fact that he tanked that badly was so shameful that if I wasn't basing this top 100 on statistics and winning, I would have moved him down several spots. He is one of the most selfish players of all time, which is the reason he has seen so little playoff success. When he reached New Jersey, they immediately stopped competing for championships. The same thing happened in Orlando and Phoenix. Coincidence? Probably not.

There is no doubt that Vince Carter is a great player. His career scoring average is still over 22 per game, #26 all time and 8th among active players. He was a highlight reel of amazing dunks. He could do anything on the offensive end, but he could have been so much more. Even considering all of that, is it so bad to be one of the 40 best players of all time? I guess not.

It's tough to justify putting Vince ahead of Walt Frazier. Vince was not a winner, and Walt was. Vince was better at his peak, but not by much. The shortness of Frazier's career appears to be the thing that hurt him most, because Vince was able to put up 10 quality seasons, while Frazier only saw 8. Even without passing the second round of the playoffs, Carter had three great playoff seasons, which appears to have been just enough to pull him past Frazier, who would easily have been ahead of Carter if he had played one more decent season.

Top 100 NBA Players: #39

Walt Frazier

(Kalb: #31, Simmons: #32, BBR: #24)

The New York Knicks have won only two championships in their entire history, in 1970 and 1973, and Walt Frazier was the biggest reason for both victories, despite the fact that Willis Reed was voted the MVP of both series. I believe that Walt should have won both times, and I'm going to show you why.

In 1970, Willis Reed was injured near the end of New York's game 5 victory and missed the entire game 6 due to a major leg injury. The Knicks lost that game and appeared to be in danger of losing the series, but Reed limped onto the court for game 7 and gave the Knicks a huge energy boost, and when the Knicks won the game and the title, everyone credited Reed for it. The truth is, Reed scored only 4 points in the game, all in the first minute, while Walt Frazier scored 36 points, handed out 19 assists, and grabbed 7 rebounds in that deciding game. Here are their overall stats for that year's playoffs:

Frazier - 16.0 pts, 7.8 reb, 8.2 ast, .478 FG%, .764 FT%
Reed - 23.7 pts, 13.8 reb, 2.8 ast, .471 FG%, .737 FT%

Reed outscored Frazier by quite a bit during the playoffs, and outrebounded him by 6 per game, although that  margin is kind of small considering Frazier was a point guard and Reed was a center. Walt had just as big a lead in the assist category, and somehow shot the ball better than the big man throughout the playoffs. When you consider that he played the single greatest game of his career in game 7, you have to give him the MVP.

While an argument can be made both ways for MVP of the 1970 Finals, giving Reed the 1973 Finals MVP is a complete travesty. It was by far the worst playoff performance of his career, but Frazier was still his usual productive self. Here are the stats from the 1973 playoffs:

Frazier - 21.9 pts, 7.3 reb, 6.2 ast, .514 FG%, .777 FT%
Reed - 12.5 pts, 7.6 reb, 1.8 ast, .466 FG%, .857 FT%

You'd have to know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball to think that Reed was the best player on that team. In fact, I would rank him as their worst starter in the playoffs, but somehow he was awarded the Finals MVP anyway. There has never been any example in history of a player deserving the MVP less, and Frazier was cheated again.

Frazier was not only a great playoff player, he was also great during the regular season. For six straight seasons he averaged at least 20 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists per game, something very few players do anymore. He was also named to the All-Defensive First Team for 7 straight seasons, which was a testament to his all-around skills.

From 1969 to 1974 Frazier got the Knicks at least to the Conference Finals, with three trips to the NBA Finals and two championships during that six-year stretch. Frazier was the best player on five of those teams, and was the second-best once. It was clear that Frazier was a winner as well as an amazing player. The thing that held him back on this list is how short his career was. After just his tenth season, he basically disappeared, leaving the Knicks for Cleveland, where he would play only 66 games over 3 seasons before retiring.

The only way in which Gasol can be seen as superior to Frazier is in career longevity, since he's played at an all-star level his entire career, while Frazier did for only about 8 seasons. Frazier was great and very steady at his peak, but it ended early. Both players participated in 3 NBA Finals, winning two championships apiece, but Gasol was the #2 guy on those teams, while Frazier was the star of his. That's what sets him ahead of Pau all time.

Top 100 NBA Players: #40

Pau Gasol

(BBR: #85)

You may not think that Pau Gasol deserves to be ranked among the all-time greats, or especially in the top 40, but there was a time that many would have said that about Scottie Pippen as well. The truth is that Pau Gasol brought about a huge change in Los Angeles after he was traded and helped the team regain its winning ways.

When Pau arrived in Los Angeles, Kobe Bryant was already an established superstar, but the Lakers weren't winning with him as their only star. Here are their playoff results in the three years Pre-Pau and Post-Trade:

Pre-Pau - missed playoffs once, lost in first round twice
Post-Trade - Lost in Finals once, won two championships

The difference between the pre- and post-trade results in each season was exactly three playoff series. The only real difference between these teams was the addition of Pau Gasol. Can you really say that he's not a great player? It's obvious to me that Gasol was the catalyst the team needed to advance.

Gasol has been a star player since the day he arrived in America. He has averaged at least 17.6 points in all 10 seasons he's been a pro, and has steadily become a better rebounder, averaging over 10 per game for the past two seasons. In each of the Lakers' title seasons he was one of the six best players in the league, although many overlooked him because he was only the second-best on his team.

English was slightly better than Pau in his prime, but it took him a few years to get going, while Gasol was a star from day one. English's playoff success was nearly nonexistent, while Gasol has been to the promised land three times and brought back two trophies as proof. Their peaks are now nearly the same length, so Gasol's playoff success is enough to push him past English and squeak him into the top 40.

Top 100 NBA Players: #41

Alex English

(Simmons: #65, BBR: #70)

Alex English has been largely forgotten today, mostly due to his lack of postseason success, but longtime Nuggets fans remember what a great player he was, and he has a place in history that cannot be forgotten.

If you were to ask somebody who the leading scorer of the 1980's was, many would answer with Michael Jordan or Larry Bird, but almost nobody would guess Alex English, but he happens to be the correct answer. He scored 19700 points from 1980 to 1989, averaging at least 23 points per game in every season and leading the league in 1983. His scoring average for the decade was 26.9, an amazing accomplishment that few have ever come close to.

He was more than just a great scorer, however. He averaged 5.7 rebounds per game over that same time period, with a peak of 8.0 in 1981. He also averaged 4.6 assists, and always hovered around that range throughout his career. He shot .511 for the decade from the field and .841 from the free throw line. He was an all-around star.

He also led the Nuggets to nine straight playoff berths, and although he never saw the NBA Finals in his career, he did take Denver to the Western Conference Finals once, averaging over 30 points per game during the 1985 playoffs. While most of the other players who have a good ranking on this list have seen quite a bit of playoff success, English did so much during the regular seasons that he can't be overlooked.

English and Allen each spent a great deal of their careers averaging over 20 points per game, but English did it for a little longer and did it in bigger quantities than Allen. Both led underdog teams to the Conference Finals in their prime years, but Allen had the good fortune of landing on a contending team late in his career and winning a title. What it really comes down to is that English's accomplishment of most points in the 1980's was just a little more impressive than Allen's all-time three-point record.

Top 100 NBA Players: #42

Ray Allen

(Simmons: #63, BBR: #56)

Right not you're probably thinking, "Are you seriously putting Ray Allen ahead of Isiah Thomas?" Yes, I am. It may not seem like a logical choice at first glance, but Allen spent a number of years as a superstar before moving into his current role as a shooter in Boston.

First let's look at the top season for each player. Isiah Thomas reached his peak in his 4th season (1985), while Allen took 5 years to reach the top. Thomas was a point guard and Allen a shooting guard, so Thomas obviously had the edge in assists, but look at all the other stats:

Thomas - 21.2 pts, 4.5 reb, 13.9 ast, 2.3 stl, .458 FG%, .257 3P%, .809 FT%
Allen - 22.0 pts, 5.2 reb, 4.6 ast, 1.5 stl, .480 FG%, .433 3P%, .888 FT%

Thomas had a big edge in assists and a slight edge in steals, but Allen had a huge edge in all of the shooting percentages and a slight lead in scoring and rebounding. I still think that Thomas' season was a little better, but it's hard to say that Allen doesn't belong in the same league as Thomas when you compare their peaks.

Ray Allen scored at least 20 points per game for 8 straight seasons in the prime of his career, peaking out at 26.4 in 2007, his final season with Seattle. Thomas scored over 20 for just 5 straight seasons, never reaching that mark after the age of 25. Allen is also known as one of the best free throw shooters of all time, and it's interesting to note that his worst season from the line (.823 when he was a rookie) was still better than Thomas' best (.818 in 1989).

Allen also holds a record that looked untouchable for a while, the all-time lead in three-pointers made. When Reggie Miller retired in 2005, he had 2560 career 3-pointers, while Allen had totaled only 1486 to that point, leaving him more than 1000 behind. What did Allen do the next season? He set a new NBA record for three-pointers made in a season and led the league for the 3rd time in his career, cutting into Miller's huge lead and making it seem like it would only be a matter of time until he broke the record, which he did in February of this year.

In 2001, Ray Allen had established himself as the star of the Milwaukee Bucks, despite having veteran stars Sam Cassell and Glenn Robinson on the roster, and he led the Bucks to the Eastern Conference Finals, where they fell to Allen Iverson and the 76ers, but there's no way they would have made it that far without Allen, who improved in almost every category in the playoffs, averaging 25.1 points, 4.1 rebounds, 6.0 assists, and shot nearly 48% from long range and 92% from the free throw line.

Allen finally saw the NBA Finals in 2008, when he helped the Celtics win their first championship in two decades. He was not the star of the team, but he was the third-best player while playing better than most teams' #2 guys. He also made a return trip to the Finals two years later, although his role had diminished a little bit more.

Isiah Thomas had more playoff success than Ray Allen, and a bigger role in that success, but his career ended much earlier than Allen's. Thomas was only relevant for 8 seasons, while Allen has kept himself playing at a star level for 13 full seasons, playing just as well at age 35 as he did at age 26. Taking the career lead in three-pointers and winning a title just cemented his legacy and moved him ahead of Thomas.

Top 100 NBA Players: #43

Isiah Thomas

(Kalb: #25, Simmons: #23, BBR: #26)

Isiah Thomas' name today is often synonymous with failure, due to his disastrous stints as coach and GM with multiple teams over the past several years, but in his playing days, he was one of the top players out there, and a great playoff performer.

Isiah was a great player right from the beginning of his career. He averaged 17 points as a rookie, then scored a career high 22.9 points per game the next season. Even with a small dip in scoring average over the next few seasons, he continued to improve, reaching his peak at age 23, when he put up the following stat line:

Thomas - 21.2 pts, 4.5 reb, 13.9 ast, 2.3 stl, .458 FG%, .809 FT%

His assist average that season led the entire league, and was the second of four straight seasons in which he averaged over 10 per game and finished in the top 3 overall. He averaged over 20 points per game for five straight seasons, and also averaged over 2 steals per game for 5 straight years.

What made Isiah great was that he was willing to sacrifice those big numbers in order to help the Pistons become winners. Starting in 1986-87, Detroit made it to four straight Eastern Conference Finals, which included three straight NBA Finals. Detroit was the winner of two straight championships, and Thomas was the star on both of those teams, but he was passed over for the Finals MVP in 1989 in favor of Joe Dumars, who was a little more fan-friendly. Here are the stats for the team's two starting guards:

Thomas - 18.2 pts, 4.3 reb, 8.3 ast, 1.6 stl, .412 FG%, .740 FT%
Dumars - 17.6 pts, 2.6 reb, 5.6 ast, 0.7 stl, .455 FG%, .861 FT%

The only way that Dumars was superior was in his shooting percentages, which shouldn't be enough to justify him taking the Finals MVP away from Thomas. Thomas was also the best player on the Pistons team that lost to Los Angeles in 1988, which means he was the best player on three straight Finals teams. There aren't a lot of players who can say that.

Thomas earns points both for being a star player early in his career and a winner later in his career, which allows him to rank pretty high on the all-time list, but his best years did not coincide with the years his team was winning, although he was still very good when the Pistons became champs. There are so many great players who had higher peaks, longer peaks, or more time as a winner, but Thomas had a bit of everything in his career.

Thomas and Schayes were the top players on exactly three NBA Finalists each, with Thomas getting a slight edge due to his team winning the title twice. Thomas reached a higher peak than Schayes early in his career, but also faded much more quickly, which balances out. The edge goes to Isiah because of his playoff heroics and his great early years, which make him much more memorable than Schayes.

Top 100 NBA Players: #44

Dolph Schayes

(Kalb: #23, Simmons: #50, BBR: #71)

Dolph Schayes was one of the biggest stars of the early NBA, and the only one who was able to see success both before and after the adoption of the shot clock. Today he is probably better known as the father of Danny Schayes, but he should be remembered as a great player and possibly the greatest Jewish player ever.

In the first four seasons of the NBA's existence, rebounds were not counted, but in the first season they were counted, Schayes was the league leader, grabbing 16.4 per game, to go along with 17 points in each contest. For some reason, he was only voted to the All-NBA Second Team, despite the fact that he was easily the best forward in the league.

He spent the next nine seasons among the league's top 5 rebounders, and he also finished among the top 10 scorers in each of those seasons. He twice led the league in minutes played, and three times in free throw percentage, topping the 90% mark twice, which is still an amazing accomplishment. He missed only three games in his first 12 seasons, earning a reputation as a tough player. Even more amazing is that he played one entire season with a broken wrist on his shooting hand, which forced him to learn to shoot left-handed, a skill that helped him immensely throughout the remainder of his career.

In his first 10 seasons, with the exception of the season he had a broken wrist, he was one of the top 6 players in the league, but was never the top player. He was the top player for the Syracuse Nationals for each of his first 12 seasons, and in most of those seasons he led them at least to the Conference Finals, or Division Finals as they were called back then.

His teams played in the NBA Finals three times, winning the title in 1955, the first season with a shot clock. He was by far the best player on that team, as evidenced by the statistical differences between him and his best teammate, Paul Seymour, which can be seen below.

Schayes - 19.0 pts, 12.8 reb, 3.6 ast, .359 FG%, .840 FT%
Seymour - 12.5 pts, 3.9 reb, 6.8 ast, .309 FG%, .900 FT%

He was also the best player on the Finals losers in both 1950 and 1954, the first of which was his rookie season. Six times his teams lost one step short of the Finals, but they always made the playoffs. In fact, the only time he missed the playoffs was his final season, after the team had moved to Philadelphia and become the 76ers, and Schayes was 35 years old, which was ancient for those days.

Overall, Schayes has to be regarded as a great player, one who was always one of the top players in the league, with only one real weakness, which was his shooting percentage, which, at .380, was even low for those days. He was a good all-around player and a winner, and was a star for a long period of time, meeting all of my criteria for inclusion on this list.

Schayes and Johnson were both perennial winners and owners of NBA championships, but they played totally different positions in totally different eras. Their level of play was very similar for about the same length of time, and both were able to continue improve their games even though they were stars from their early years. Schayes wins the battle here because he was the star player for his entire career, while Johnson was usually the sidekick.

Top 100 NBA Players: #45

Dennis Johnson

(Simmons: #52, BBR: #99)

Dennis Johnson is one of the most underrated guards of all time, as evidenced by the fact that he wasn't even elected to the Hall of Fame until after his death, which was a full 17 seasons after he retired. Not only did he win three championships, but he was an integral part of each of those teams.

He started his career with the Seattle Supersonics, where in just his second season he helped take the extreme underdogs all the way to the NBA Finals. His averages went from 12.7 points and 3.6 rebounds in the regular season to 16.1 points and 4.6 rebounds in the playoffs, but in the last game of the NBA Finals, he choked, going 0-14 as the Sonics lost to the Bullets.

The next season, he came back in playoff form, matching the averages above and taking Seattle back to the Finals, and because he performed well throughout the playoffs and redeemed his previous failing, he was awarded the Finals MVP Award. In my profile of Gus Williams (#57) I showed why I thought the award should have gone to him instead, but there is no arguing that Johnson was one of the two stars on the title team, and that was in just his third season.

Johnson was even better the next season, averaging 19 points, 5.1 rebounds, and 4.1 assists per game while being named to the All-Defensive Team for the second of what would become nine straight seasons. Unfortunately, the Sonics lost in the Western Conference Finals that year to the Lakers, who featured Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and a rookie named Magic Johnson.

He was traded to the Phoenix Suns after that season in exchange for Paul Westphal, and while he continued to put up big numbers, he was not able to replicate the playoff success he enjoyed in Seattle. While he was a Sun, he made his only appearance on the All-NBA First Team and enjoyed his most impressive personal seasons.

After three season in Phoenix, he made his way to Boston via another trade, and was able to use his experience to help the Celtics make it to four straight NBA Finals, two of which earned him additional championship rings. While Kevin McHale and Robert Parish tend to be more recognized as stars during that period for Boston, more often than not it was Dennis Johnson playing second fiddle to Larry Bird on those great teams.

Above it all, Dennis Johnson was a winner, making the playoffs in every season after his rookie year ended. He made it at least to the Conference Finals 8 times in his career, and played in 6 NBA Finals. He was twice the second-best player on a champion, and he was always in the top 4 on those 8 teams that made deep playoff runs. Even though he never averaged 20 points per game for a full season, he was a huge asset if you wanted a winner.

Johnson and McHale played together on the great Celtic teams of the 1980's, and they took turns being the #2 and #3 guy on those teams. McHale was a slightly better player overall, but Johnson gets the edge over McHale because he had already built a nice playoff resume before he even came to Boston.

Top 100 NBA Players: #46

Kevin McHale

(Kalb: #34, Simmons: #35, BBR: #48)

Today is the second straight day in which a Celtic big man claims a spot among the top 50 players of all time. McHale was a major part of the Celtics dynasty of the 1980's, but he was never the star player, because Larry Bird was his teammate during his entire peak.

McHale made it at least to the Conference Finals 7 times in his 13-year career, winning three championships along the way. He was twice a top 3 player on a Conference Finalist, twice a top 3 player on an NBA Finalist, and once the #2 player on a champion, the 1986 Celtics. He was a great player, but he was never known as a superstar, although there were signs that he could have become one.

In 1987, McHale hit his peak in almost every statistical category, was named to the All-NBA First Team, and came in 4th in the MVP voting. Those aren't things that are normally associated with lesser stars, and it proves that he had the skills of a superstar, but was willing to defer to a more talented teammate in order to be more successful. Here are his stats from that monster season:

McHale - 26.1 pts, 9.9 reb, 2.6 ast, 2.2 blk, .604 FG%, .836 FT%

Only his free throw percentage and assist average were not career highs, and his field goal percentage led the entire league, the first of two straight seasons in which he did that. Unfortunately, he faded in the playoffs, averaging only 21.1 points and shooting only .762 from the free throw line, and the Celtics lost in the Finals to the rival Lakers.

Cowens' early years and McHale's later years basically cancel each other out, and both peaked out at almost the exact same level. Cowens gets some help from being the best player on a championship team, but McHale was a top player on more teams that made deep playoff runs. McHale gets the edge for being a star player for just one season longer than Cowens, but the two are basically dead even.

Top 100 NBA Players: #47

Dave Cowens

(Kalb: #32, Simmons: #31, BBR: #67)

Dave Cowens was just one in a long line of star players to wear Celtic green, and though he won two championships with the team, that is actually quite low to be considered an all-time Celtic legend. That's not to say that Cowens wasn't a great player, because he was definitely one of the best players in the NBA for a few years.

For four seasons, from 1972 to 1976, Cowens was one of the very best players in the entire league, ranking as one of the top 5 players in the league three times and in the top 10 the other year. During those years, he took the Celtics to two Eastern Conference Finals and two NBA championships. His average stats over that period were very impressive, and they are listed below.

Cowens - 19.7 pts, 15.7 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.2 stl, 1.1 blk

He finished among the top 3 rebounders in each of those seasons, with three straight seasons as the runner-up. He even won an MVP award in 1973, but he wasn't even the best player on his own team that season. John Havlicek, even though he was nearing the end of his career, was still better that season. Here is a statistical comparison:

Cowens - 20.5 pts, 16.2 reb, 4.1 ast, .452 FG%, .779 FT%
Havlicek - 23.8 pts, 7.1 reb, 6.6 ast, .450 FG%, .858 FT%

Cowens had a large lead in rebounding, and Havlicek had the big edge in free throw shooting, so Havlicek's edge in scoring and passing show that he was a better player that year. However, the basketball gods made up for the mistake by giving JoJo White the Finals MVP Award over Cowens, despite Cowens' overall playoff edge. Here are their postseason stats from 1976:

Cowens - 21.0 pts, 16.4 reb, 4.6 ast, .457 FG%, .759 FT%
White - 22.7 pts, 3.9 reb, 5.4 ast, .445 FG%, .821 FT%

White may have scored a few more points than Cowens, but their assist numbers were even closer, and Cowens led all postseason players in rebounding that year. Cowens was the top player on that championship team, and the second-best player on the previous championship team, and was the best player on two Conference Finalists as well. For those few seasons, he was one of the top players in the game.

That's when things got weird. After the Finals win, he spent the night sleeping on a park bench in Boston. When the following season began, Cowens didn't show up, instead spending a couple of months as a cab driver and saying that he felt burnt out. He eventually returned, but was never quite as good as he was before. He ended up retiring at age 31, which is usually the time when most superstars are riding the back end of their peak years.

Wilkins may have been flashier and had a longer career peak, but Cowens was a winner, making it to the Conference Finals in 5 straight seasons, and he was a top-2 player on four of those teams. If Cowens hadn't burnt out, he could have been just as good as Wilkins overall, but the fact that he made a difference in the playoffs gives him an edge over Wilkins, who could never clear the second round.

Top 100 NBA Players: #48

Dominique Wilkins

(Kalb: #49, Simmons: #55, BBR: #32)

Dominique Wilkins was one of the most entertaining and exciting players in the league for an entire decade, but he had a couple of flaws that kept him from becoming one of the best of all time. He was an incredibly dunker, and won two dunk contests and nearly won two others.

For 10 straight seasons, Wilkins averaged more than 25 points per game, finishing in the top 7 in the league in each season in which he played enough games. He led the league in scoring in 1986, when Jordan was out with the only major injury of his career, and finished second to him 3 other times. The only problem was that he was too focused on getting his points. Former teammate Doc Rivers said that you could ask Wilkins how many points he had at any time, and he would immediately answer correctly.

Wilkins is the greatest player to never play in the Conference Finals, another fatal flaw. Only a couple of other players in my entire top 100 can say that, which has to be taken into consideration when considering his place in history. It wasn't that he didn't score in the playoffs, because his average was nearly identical to his regular season average, but he didn't have what it took to win.

Wilkins was a good rebounds, averaging 6.7 per game over his career, and he also shot over 81% from the free throw line for his career. What that does is prove that Wilkins was not a one-trick pony, but actually a pretty good all-around player. The problem that he had was that he never had a true star teammate, which made the Hawks a one-man show during his time there. Everybody knows that no team can win the championship without at least two star players.

Even though Miller had a lot more playoff heroics and success than Wilkins, it is obvious from the chart above that Wilkins was the better player for the majority of his career. During their peak seasons, Miller was only better twice, when Wilkins missed half a season due to injury, and when he was finally traded away from Atlanta. Wilkins' scoring average was always at least 6 points higher, and his shooting percentages weren't far behind Miller's. Overall, the Human Highlight Film takes this one.

Top 100 NBA Players: #49

Reggie Miller

(Kalb: #48, Simmons: #62, BBR: #34)

Reggie Miller was considered a superstar by some, and just a regular star by many others, but there is no doubt that he has an important part in NBA history. He is one of the best shooters in the history of the league, and his playoff heroics are legendary.

Reggie was a scorer and shooter, but not much else. He was the all-time leader in three-point field goals made for over a decade, and he led the league in free throw percentage 5 times, and he currently ranks ninth all-time from the line. He also managed to score at least 18 points per game for 12 straight seasons, another feat that has been accomplished by fewer than 10 players ever.

Reggie never won a championship, but he sure made it close a number of times. He made it to the the NBA Finals once as the Pacers' best player, losing to the Lakers, and made five other trips to the Eastern Conference Finals, 4 times as the star player. Not only did he get his team deep into the playoffs over and over, he had a memorable performance in nearly every one of those postseasons.

In 1994, the first time they made the Conference Finals, Miller scored 25 points in the 4th quarter of game 5, including 5 three-pointers, and almost singlehandedly beat the Knicks. The next season he scored 8 points in under 8 seconds to bring the Pacers back from a 6-point deficit in the final minute. In 1998, he hit the game-winning three-pointer with less than a second left over Michael Jordan to tie the series. In 2002, he hit a 40-foot three-pointer at the buzzer to send the deciding game 5 to overtime with New Jersey, then drove in for a dunk to send the game to a second overtime, at the age of 36.

Reggie always played his best in the playoffs. During the decade that he was Indiana's best player, he averaged 21 points during the regular season, and 23 points per game in the playoffs. He may be the best playoff performer ever to never win a championship.

Reggie Miller did not reach the peak level that Shawn Marion did, but he was able to maintain his peak for a long time, performing just as well at age 34 as he did at age 24. Miller also saw more playoff success than Marion, since he was the star player on five teams that made deep playoff runs, while Marion could only say that once. Miller's longevity and consistent high level of play are what puts him a step ahead of Marion.

Top 100 NBA Players: #50

Shawn Marion

(BBR: #79)

Shawn Marion is easily the most surprising member of my all-time top 50. Only one other member of my top 50 doesn't appear on either Elliott Kalb's top 50 or Bill Simmons' top 96, and you'll see him at #40. Marion asked out of Phoenix because he felt he wasn't getting the credit he deserved, and I have to agree, which is why he's here.

In just his second season, Marion showed the all-around skills that would make him a star. That year he averaged 17.3 points, 10.7 rebounds, 1.7 steals, and 1.4 blocks, and he continued to improved from there. From 2002 to 2007, he was incredibly solid, improving his numbers across the board and helping the Suns become annual contenders. His stats from that period are listed below:

Marion - 19.8 pts, 10.4 reb, 2.1 ast, 2.1 stl, 1.4 blk, .481 FG%, .831 FT%

Marion has played on three teams that made deep playoff runs, and had a major part in all three. In 2004, he was the third-best player on the Suns team that made the Western Conference Finals, playing behind Amare and Steve Nash. The next season, Amare went down with an injury, so Marion stepped into his role and led the Suns to the Conference Finals again, this time as their best player. His most recent playoff run happened just a few months ago, as he helped the Mavericks win their first championship as the #3 player on the team.

Marion is one of only 5 players in NBA history to amass over 1500 steals and 1000 blocks in his career, and the others are all pretty recognizable names: Julius Erving, Hakeem Olajuwon, Kevin Garnett, and Karl Malone. He led the league in total steals twice, and finished in the top 10 in rebounding 6 times, despite being only 6-7. Taken all together, you have to recognize that the Matrix really was the star he thought he was.

You may not realize it, but Marion was actually better than Webber for the majority of their playing careers. Their per-game averages were pretty similar, but Marion was a much better free throw shooter and had a lot more playoff success than Webber, not to mention the fact that he rarely missed time with injuries, which Webber did with great regularity. Marion definitely has had the kind of career that needs to be remembered.

Top 100 NBA Players: #51

Chris Webber

(Simmons: #72, BBR: #62)

When Chris Webber was drafted #1 overall in 1993, most people expected him to be the next superstar. He had been the best all through high school and college, and the teams he played on were winners, always finishing among the top 4 by season's end. His NBA career started out well enough, with his 17.5 points and 9.1 rebounds good enough to win him the Rookie of the Year Award, but he butted heads with his coach, Don Nelson, and was traded away to Washington, where his injury problems started and he never really reached his potential.

One thing most people don't remember about Webber was that he was a horrendous free throw shooter. In his first six seasons, his average from the line was .541, not much higher than his field goal percentage of .508. That included the 1998-99 season, in which he led the league in rebounding with 13.0 per game and averaged 20 points, yet somehow shot only .454 from the free throw line.

Webber really hit his stride once he reached Sacramento, although injuries still sidelined him for at least 10 games nearly every season. From 1999 to 2003, he was one of the top players in the league and led the Kings to the playoffs every year, where they usually met up with the Lakers and folded. Even with Los Angeles as a thorn in his side, his numbers over that span were pretty good:

Webber - 24.8 pts, 10.6 reb, 4.7 ast, 1.5 stl, 1.5 blk, .479 FG%, .704 FT%

You'll notice that he was able to do a bit of everything, from crashing the boards to finding open teammates to actually hitting his free throws. During that time the Kings made the only meaningful playoff run of Webber's career, when they lost in 7 games to Los Angeles in the Western Conference Finals in 2002. Webber's numbers during that playoff run didn't vary much from his regular season numbers, with the exception of his free throw shooting, which dipped below 60% again.

Webber may have had some nice numbers, for example his nine straight seasons of at least 20 points per game, and his teams may have won more games than they lost, but Webber had two fatal flaws. His teams could never get anywhere in the playoffs, and Webber spent a lot of time on the bench wearing street clothes. In seven different seasons he missed at least 15 games, and twice he missed more than 50. He had the talent to be one of the all-time greatest players, but he never realized his full potential.

Chris Webber and Bob McAdoo had a lot of similarities. They were both about the same size and had similar styles of play. Both won the Rookie of the Year Award and were traded multiple times during their productive years. McAdoo won two championships, but was not a big contributor to those titles. Webber gets the edge because he was able to keep himself in the mix as a star player clear through his 13th season, while McAdoo was basically done after 6. Even with the spectacular seasons early in Mac's career, he can't quite measure up to Webber historically.

Top 100 NBA Players: #52

Bob McAdoo

(Kalb: #44, Simmons: #61, BBR: #39)

Bob McAdoo was a great player for a few years in the 1970's, and if he had maintained his early level of play for a full decade, he would have been one of the top ten players of all time easily. Instead, he developed a reputation for not caring, then tried to turn it around once he was past his peak by playing unselfishly for two champs.

McAdoo started off his career in style, averaging 18.0 points and 9.1 rebounds per game and winning the Rookie of the Year Award, but nobody saw what was coming next. He came in second in the MVP race by leading the league in scoring and field goal percentage, with 30.6 points, 15.1 rebounds, 3.3 blocks, and a .547 field goal percentage.

The next year he was even better, upping his scoring average to 34.5, while still grabbing 14.1 rebounds and leading the league in minutes played. That performance won him the MVP Award, and he definitely deserved it. Here are his stats and Rick Barry's, who should have come in second in the voting that year.

McAdoo - 34.5 pts, 14.1 reb, 2.2 ast, 2.1 blk, .512 FG%, .805 FT%
Barry - 30.6 pts, 5.7 reb, 6.2 ast, 2.9 stl, .464 FG%, .904 FT%

Barry was definitely good, but McAdoo was definitely the best player that year. The next season he led the league in scoring for the third straight season, and he is one of only eight players who can say that. (Most of the others have yet to appear on this list.) Here are his overall stats from that three-year period, when he was one of the top 2 players and the league scoring leader.

McAdoo - 32.1 pts, 13.8 reb, 2.8 ast, 2.5 blk, .514 FG%, .787 FT%

He remained a good player for the next two years, but his scoring average started to drop and he still could not get past the second round of the playoffs. From 1976 to 1982, he played for 6 different teams, wearing out his welcome more and more quickly in each stop. When he finally made it to Los Angeles in 1981, he finally found himself in a good situation and applied himself in a sixth man role, which helped the Lakers win the championship, to which he contributed 16.7 points and 6.8 rebounds per game. He was not the star anymore, but he had contributed to a title while he was still slightly relevant. He would win one more title before retiring, but by then he wasn't quite as important to the team.

McAdoo was the first high-scoring, outside-shooting big man, something that has become commonplace in today's game. If he had been born 25 years later, he could have dominated in an era in which his style was not so uncommon, and he may have been appreciated more.

McAdoo, like McGrady, won multiple scoring titles in a row, but he was a much better rebounder than McGrady was, even taking their positions into consideration. McAdoo's playoff success, although meager, still beat McGrady's handily. Even though McGrady was good for a little longer, McAdoo was so good for those three seasons that there is no way he can be any lower on this list.

Top 100 NBA Players: #53

Tracy McGrady

(Kalb: #41, Simmons: #75, BBR: #51)

Tracy McGrady is another example of a player whose promising career was derailed by injury too early, but when he was good, he was really good. He twice led the entire league in scoring before he turned 25, and he averaged at least 20-5-5 six times.

McGrady came straight to the NBA from high school, but he didn't become a star until his 4th season, when he would have been a college senior. That's the season when he left Toronto and Vince Carter's shadow and became a star in his own right in Orlando. That year he improved his scoring average by 11.4 points and won the Most Improved Player Award while making the All-Star team and All-NBA Second Team.

He continued to improve over the next two years, until the 2003 season, when he led the league with 32.1 points per game while grabbing 6.5 rebounds and passing out 5.5 assists per game. That year he also shot a career-high .457 from the field, which would drop off considerably every season afterward. After one more season of leading the league in scoring, he was traded to the Houston Rockets for Steve Francis.

In Houston he continued to be a star, but he only finished in the top 10 in scoring twice in 5 full seasons, and he missed 113 games over that time, which caused the Rockets to struggle in the postseason. In fact, McGrady is probably the best player in NBA history who never got past the first round of the playoffs. It wasn't really his fault, because his postseason numbers were pretty impressive. Just look at what he did from 2001 to 2005:

McGrady - 31.6 pts, 6.8 reb, 6.1 ast, 1.5 stl

While he may have failed to advance in the playoffs and fell from his peak far too early, McGrady has to be remembered as a great player. He averaged over 20 points per game in 8 straight seasons, led the league in scoring twice, and made the All-NBA First Team twice. It sad to say that at age 31, he's probably washed up and past his prime.

Nash has a little advantage over McGrady in playoff success, and a definite lead in longevity, but McGrady was so good early in his career that Nash can't really argue that he's the better player. Nash could pass McGrady if he is able to continue to contribute over the next couple years, but for now McGrady's career accomplishments are just a little bit more impressive.

Top 100 NBA Players: #54

Steve Nash

(Simmons: #38, BBR: #31)

Steve Nash is one of my favorite players of all time, so it hurts a little bit to have to put him clear down here on the all-time list, but he has been slightly overrated by the fact that he won two MVP awards that he probably shouldn't have. But just because I don't quite feel he was MVP-worthy does not mean that he his shown some major feats of greatness during his career.

Steve Nash is the holder of several impressive records. One of the biggest is that he has the highest free throw percentage in the history of the NBA. Only two players can claim an overall free throw percentage over 90% for their career, and Nash is one of them. In 2010, he broke John Stockton's record as the oldest player to lead the league in assists, and he broke it by 3 years. The following year, he did it again, setting the bar even higher by winning the assist title at age 37. There has never been a point guard who played this well this late in his career, and that includes Jason Kidd and Stockton.

He is also one of only five players in history to achieve a 50-40-90 season, shooting 50% from the field, 40% from long range, and 90% from the free throw line. Only five players have ever achieved this: Larry Bird, Dirk Nowitzki, Reggie Miller, Mark Price, and Nash. But Nash hasn't just joined that club, he is the captain of it. Nash has achieved it 4 times, including three straight seasons from 2007-2010, while the other 4 have done it only five times combined. Nash barely missed out on making it five straight years in the 2006-07 season, when he finished the season shooting .899 from the free throw line. He is, without a doubt, the best in-game shooter in the history of the NBA.

Steve Nash is one of only two MVP's in history to never make an appearance in the NBA Finals (the other is 2011 winner Derrick Rose). Even with that fact, he hasn't had a complete lack of playoff success. He has been a top 3 player on 4 Western Conference Finalists, but he has never been able to get over that hump. In addition to his eight seasons in the top 3 in assists in the league, which includes 5 times as #1, he has also led all playoff players in assists average 4 times, with an average of 13.3 per game in 2007 as his best performance.

I said earlier that I didn't believe Nash should have won those two MVP awards. It hurts more than you can imagine for me to write that, but it's true. In 2005, when he won his first award, Nash was credited with the Suns' success because he was the new guy in town, but Amare was very impressive that year, and probably should have won the award himself. Here are their stats from that season:

Stoudemire - 26.0 pts, 8.9 reb, 1.6 ast, 1.6 blk, .559 FG%, .733 FT%
Nash - 15.5 pts, 3.3 reb, 11.5 ast, .502 FG%, .431 3P%, .887 FT%

Each was impressive in his own right, but because Amare showed so much improvement that year, people assumed it was because of Nash. Having a great point guard to get you the ball has to help, but it also can't hurt that Amare was 22 years old and still growing as a player. The next year, Amare went down with a knee injury, and the Suns weren't expected to go anywhere, but Nash led them to a respectable record and a return trip to the Conference Finals, so he was able to repeat as MVP, but Dirk led the Mavericks to a better record with better numbers, which are listed below:

Nowitzki - 26.6 pts, 9.0 reb, 2.8 ast, .480 FG%, .406 3P%, .901 FT%
Nash - 18.8 pts, 4.2 reb, 10.5 ast, .512 FG%, .439 3P%, .921 FT%

Nash's resume was definitely stronger statistically in 2006, but his team was not one of the top 3 record-wise in the league, which makes him the only MVP in the past 25 years who can say that. There's no doubt that he's a star player, and he may not be done yet. He could still make a run at the top 50 of all time, but it might take a championship to do it.

The interesting thing about Nash is how he started rising to his peak at the point in his career where most players start to drop from relevance. His peak is higher and has lasted longer than Hamilton's, but Hamilton's playoff success kept him somewhat close to Nash overall. Nash, even though he's several years older than Hamilton, still has a chance to add to his career accomplishments, while Rip seems to be on the downside of his career.

Top 100 NBA Players: #55

Richard Hamilton

(BBR: #176)

Richard Hamilton may not seem like an obvious choice to be included among the best players of all time, but many people overlook him because he doesn't have any single thing that sets him apart from other players. He's not a huge scorer or rebounder, he doesn't hit a ton of threes, and he's not known for his defense, but he has been a very consistent player for the past decade and is also a winner.

As I said above, Hamilton is not a huge scorer, but from 2000 through 2010, he scored at least 17.3 points per game, but never more than 20.1 per game. He has also shot over 83% from the free throw line for that entire time, which is a very solid average. That means that his team was always able to count on him to bring somewhere near 20 points every night for a decade, and they were always able to keep him on the court during crunch time, which is a very good attribute for a star player to have.

As a member of the Detroit Pistons, Hamilton made 6 straight appearances in the Eastern Conference Finals, twice advancing to the NBA Finals and winning one championship. When I highlighted Chauncey Billups at #63, I compared the two players' stats to show that Rip should have been the Finals MVP rather than Billups, and Hamilton was their best player more consistently over that 6-year stretch than anyone else.

Hamilton is also the type of player who always turns it on during the playoffs, scoring more in the playoffs during five of the six deep playoff runs. He has never averaged 4 rebounds per game in a regular season, but his overall playoff rebound average is 4.0. He even raised his already-impressive free throw shooting percentage by 10 points in the postseason. It's no wonder the Pistons had so much success over the past decade.

Statistically, there is no way to formulate an argument that puts Hamilton over Howard. Hamilton has played for longer, but Howard's level of play has been so high throughout his entire career that he's obviously the better player. The reason that Rip sits ahead of him in the all-time rankings is that he led his teams deeper into the playoffs more often than Howard has so far. Unless Howard retires today, he will pass Hamilton next year, but for now Rip has the slight edge due to playoff success.

Top 100 NBA Players: #56

Dwight Howard

(Simmons: #91, BBR: #47)

Dwight Howard is one of the most impressive young players in the NBA today. He is the only player in NBA history to be named Defensive Player of the Year 3 straight times, and his career rebounding average is #12 all time and #1 among all active players.

Howard has only two real weaknesses: he is a horrible free throw shooter, and he turns the ball over about 3 times per game. Other than that, he is one of the most incredible talents to ever take the court. He has missed only 7 games in his 7 seasons, has the 4th-highest field goal percentage of all time, and leads the league in blocks and rebounds almost every year.

Howard has constantly improved throughout his career, starting out as the youngest player to ever average a double-double for a season, as a rookie at age 19. That year he averaged only 10 rebounds per game, but he has not let his average dip below 12 since. In his first two seasons, Orlando missed the playoffs, but since then they have made five straight appearances in the postseason.

In his fifth season, he led Orlando all the way to a surprise appearance in the NBA Finals, putting up his usual impressive numbers all the way. Those numbers are listed below:

Howard (2009 playoffs) - 20.3 pts, 15.3 reb, 2.6 blk, .601 FG%

The next season his numbers dipped slightly, and as a result the Magic made it only to the Eastern Conference Finals, but Howard was unquestionably their leader in both campaigns. In fact, other than his rookie season, he's been the best player in Orlando, going clear back to when he was just 19 years old.

Howard's career rebounding average currently stands at 12.9 per game, tops among active players, and the best of any player in the past 30 years other than Dennis Rodman. With Shaq's recent retirement, Howard also became the active leader in field goal percentage, with a .578 career mark that ranks fourth all-time.If he is able to remain healthy and have a career into his mid-30's, it's quite likely we could be talking about him as one of the top 5 centers of all time.

Howard has only played a short time, but in the time he's had he's already surpassed what Williams did in his too-short career. The biggest difference came because Howard didn't take a full season off in his prime like Williams did. Both led teams to the NBA Finals, with Howard's team falling just short of the title. That small difference wasn't enough for me to call Williams a better player, and who knows how high Howard will rise in the end.

Top 100 NBA Players: #57

Gus Williams

(BBR: #170)

Gus Williams played like a superstar for several years in Seattle, yet then and now he is underappreciated for what he accomplished. Most fans today haven't even heard of him, and the professionals who have ranked the all-time greats like I'm doing also ignored him completely, but there are some good reasons to put him on this list.

Williams was the best player on the 1979 NBA Champion Seattle SuperSonics, but even then he was overlooked for a more recognizable teammate, Dennis Johnson, when it came to the voting for Finals MVP. The truth is that Johnson was awarded the MVP because of the way he had bounced back after going 0 for 14 in the deciding game of the Finals the previous season, but Williams was still the better overall player. Here are their stats from the playoffs:

Johnson - 20.9 pts, 6.1 reb, 4.1 ast, 1.6 stl, .450 FG%, .771 FT%
Williams - 26.6 pts, 4.1 reb, 3.7 ast, 2.0 stl, .476 FG%, .709 FT%

There was some pretty good balance between the two guards among these five categories during that postseason, but Williams outscored Johnson by more than 5 points per game, and in my opinion was the real reason that Seattle won the series and the championship.

Williams had been the second-best player on the Sonics during their run to the Finals the previous season, and he was once again the best player for Seattle as they advanced to the Western Conference Finals in 1980. That's 3 straight seasons of making at least the Conference Finals as the star of the team or his top sidekick. He was obviously feeling unappreciated at this point, so he sat out the following season in a contract dispute, a season that most likely would have been his best, judging by his career trajectory, which you can see in the chart below.

When he returned after a one-season hiatus, he picked up right where he left off statistically, actually improving in many categories, but he was never able to see the same playoff success as he had before. He never made it past the second round again in his career, but he was still enough of a star to be worthy of some recognition. Here are his stats for the 3 years before and after the holdout season.

Williams (1977-1980) - 19.8 pts, 3.3 reb, 4.2 ast, 2.3 stl
Williams (1981-1984) - 20.7 pts, 2.7 reb, 7.8 ast, 2.3 stl

He may not have received the recognition he deserved back when he was starring for Seattle or today, but he hasn't been forgotten here, and there is no way I can leave a player this talented off of my top 100.

Williams and Stoudemire both took an entire season off after their peak seasons, Stoudemire for knee surgery and Williams for a contract dispute. Their regular season success is pretty similar, with Williams holding a slight edge because we've been able to see his entire career already, and the slight edge in playoff success due to leading Seattle to the title puts him above Stoudemire any way you look at it.

Top 100 NBA Players: #58

Amare Stoudemire

(BBR: #58)

Amare Stoudemire has been one of the best players in the league for the past decade, despite missing chunks of time for 3 separate injuries over that time. He was named to the All-NBA First Team the season after he had two major knee surgeries, and he still isn't slowing down.

Amare started out on the fast track. In just his third year he was the #3 player in the entire league, although he didn't get recognized for it at the time because everyone fell in love with new teammate Steve Nash. People attributed Amare's great season to Nash's skill at getting him the ball, and while it had to have helped, there's no doubt that he was improving also. Here are his numbers from that season:

Stoudemire - 26.0 pts, 8.9 reb, 1.6 blk, .559 FG%

His numbers were even better in the playoffs that year, when he led the Suns to the Western Conference Finals as their best player. Yes, you read that right, and this is coming from one of the biggest Steve Nash fans you will ever meet. Here are his playoff stats:

Stoudemire - 29.9 pts, 10.7 reb, 2.0 blk, .539 FG%

The argument that Nash made Stoudemire was put to the test last season, when Amare left Nash's side for the first time in 6 years to play in New York, and the result was one of his best seasons yet, despite what many Suns fans predicted. It only goes to show that Amare really was a superstar player in Phoenix, and that he really could have won the 2006 MVP if he hadn't blown out his knee.

Amare once again took the Suns to the Western Conference Finals in 2010, although he didn't play as well in the playoffs, allowing Jason Richardson to take the title of Best Sun in the playoffs, and as a result they once again failed to make the Finals.

Other than the season that was virtually lost to injury and his rookie season, Amare has always averaged over 20 points and 8 rebounds per game, and he was shot over 50% in six straight seasons. He has been in the top 10 in scoring 4 times and in shooting percentage 5 times. All that, and he is still only 28 years old, with plenty of time to progress as a player before he starts declining.

Amare is not the scorer that Dantley was, but he's already experienced much more playoff success than Dantley, and has also shot the ball better and rebounded it more often than Dantley. He's made more appearances on the All-NBA Team and been traded less. It all adds up to Amare being a better overall player than Dantley, and his best may be still to come.